According to a survey of graduating medical students conduct

[RonPurewal]

but if i complete the sentence above.is it right?

i think you're confusing "above" and "below".

minority graduates are to plan on practicing....
nearly four times more likely than are other graduates (to plan on practicing....)

i'm not sure why you are trying to break up the sentence like this, but, no, this is not a legitimate way to break up the sentence.

if you have "N times as ADJ/ADV...", then the adjective/adverb is a fundamental part of the sentence; you can't take it out. for instance, the sentence I am twice as tall as my cousin is based on the simpler sentence I am tall; you can't take the "tall" out of this sentence.

on another note, your attempt to break up the sentence in this way suggests that you aren't thinking about what it means; it's almost as though you're treating it as some sort of mathematical equation with meaningless parts. not good! you always have to think about what the sentence means. here, if you do, you'll realize that this is not a legitimate transformation.

minority graduates are to plan on practicing ....
nearly four times more likely than are other graduates....

is the helpng verb "are" necessary in the second part of the sentence? is the phrase "to plan " be the object of the first part of the sentence.

i'm sorry, but i am lost here. what are the "first part" and "second part" that you're referring to here?
are you referring to the first and second parts of the actual, correct sentence?
or are you referring to the two parts you wrote above (which aren't legitimate constructions)?



i'll be appreciate if someone can help me.[/quote]

[vidhya.rao]

All,

Im still confused even after reading the entire post. Could anyone clarify where Im going wrong.

When I scanned the underline portion, I skimmed the sentence in the following way by removing prepositional phrases.

a)minority graduates are nearly four times more likely than are other graduates <prepositional phrase> to practice <prepositional phrase>

b)Minority graduates are nearly four times more likely than other graduates <relative clause> - doesnt give me complete sentence - so not the right answer.

c)minority graduates are nearly four times as likely as other graduates to plan <prepostional phrase>


based on the above, option a talks about "to practice"
option c talks about "to plan". Also by looking at the skimmed structure neither of option (a) or option (c) does complete the sentence to form a independent clause.

Could someone throw new lights on my understanding?

Thanks

[tim]

i'm not sure what your question is here other than an inquiry about whether A and C create complete sentences. you are correct that A doesn't. what makes you think C isn't complete though?

[ghong14]

If we ignore the idiom issue "to Plan" in answer choice A isn't the construction four times as likely as preferred over four times more likely? I thought that choice A was wrong because of the later issue as well.

[tim]

The issue is not what is "preferred", but whether either of those constructions is wrong. And there is no reason to reject either of those constructions on its own. Remember, sentence correction is not about figuring out what is preferred or correct, but is instead about finding four wrong answers.

[aliag916]

Hello, In terms of Sentence Structure please tell me if my analysis is okay ?
The subject, verb and object are as follows:
a. graduates, are and "to practice"; so this is a sentence.
c. graduates, are and "to plan" ; so this is a sentence.
d. It, is and "to practice" ; so this is a sentence.
e. It, is and "to practice" ; so this is a sentence.

Also, can I use this to narrow down the choices and then focus on whats wrong coz i may not recall all the idioms etc....?
Thank you!

[RonPurewal]

There aren't any issues of overall sentence structure here.

Also, can I use this to narrow down the choices and then focus on whats wrong coz i may not recall all the idioms etc....?
Thank you!

On this problem... well, no.
As you wrote yourself, all of the choices are complete sentences, so you can't eliminate anything in this problem for that reason.

On other problems, sure -- if there are actually sentence structure issues, then, if you're comfortable doing so, you can use that as a first elimination.

[Haibara]

the biggest problem with D is its poor idiomatic construction. you don't say 'it is X times MORE likely that A will happen, RATHER THAN B'; 'more' is supposed to go with 'THAN', and is incompatible with 'rather than'. the proper construction would be 'it is X times more likely that A will happen than that B will happen.'

Ron or other experts:
let me rephrase it:

It is nearly four times more likely that minority graduates will plan to practice... than that other graduates will.

The above sentence is correct, right? I want to ask whether "that" and "will" could be left out? I mean the following:

It is nearly four times more likely that minority graduates will plan to practice... than other graduates.

If the above sentence is correct, then I see the only problem that makes D incorrect is the use of "rather" before than.
If the above sentence is incorrect, then I guess the problem lies in parallelism. Because a sentence can not be parallel to a noun phrase. However as Ron said:

in general, you shouldn't include such helping verbs, in parallel constructions unless they're NECESSARY.
pretty much the only way in which one of these helping verbs can be necessary is if it gets rid of ambiguity.

Since there isn't any ambiguity without "that" and "will", I think the second sentence could also be correct.

What's the problem with my thinking ? Thanks~

[RonPurewal]

It is nearly four times more likely that minority graduates will plan to practice... than that other graduates will.

The above sentence is correct, right?

Yes.

I want to ask whether "that" and "will" could be left out? I mean the following:

It is nearly four times more likely that minority graduates will plan to practice... than other graduates.

This sentence doesn't work.

If the second part of the comparison is just "other graduates", then the first part clearly must be a noun; that noun can work in one of two ways.

1/
It can appear directly next to "than".
Harvard graduates who start companies are more likely to hire strangers than other graduates.

2/
It can be the subject of "is/are more likely".
Engineering graduates are more likely to earn high starting salaries than other graduates.

In case #2, the sentence would be better written with the comparison in one continuous piece (Engineering graduates are more likely than other graduates to earn high starting salaries), although the current #2 is not strictly wrong.

--

In the sentence here, "4 times more likely" is buried in the middle of the clause It is ... that xxxx will happen, so the other half needs to be an entire statement that will parallel the statement that xxx will happen.

[calm.jing]

If the second part of the comparison is just "other graduates", then the first part clearly must be a noun; that noun can work in one of two ways.

1/
It can appear directly next to "than".
Harvard graduates who start companies are more likely to hire strangers than other graduates.

2/
It can be the subject of "is/are more likely".
Engineering graduates are more likely to earn high starting salaries than other graduates.

Hi Ron,

I am confused. I thought sentence #1 is ambiguous, because "other graduates" can be compared to either "strangers" or "Harvard graduates". Is my thinking correct? Please clarify.

Thanks in advance! :)

[Haibara]

In the sentence here, "4 times more likely" is buried in the middle of the clause It is ... that xxxx will happen, so the other half needs to be an entire statement that will parallel the statement that xxx will happen.

Ron, you hit the nail on the head. What makes the sentence of comparison more complicated is exactly the "It is ... that xxxx will happen" structure.

From your explanation, can I consider it in the following way?

It is nearly four times more likely that minority graduates will plan to practice... than that other graduates will.

Since "It" refers to "that minority graduates will plan to practice... ", I reorganise it to :

(That minority graduates will plan to practice... ) is nearly four times more likely than (that other graduates will).

I know the above sentence is especially weird, but in this pattern, I could then clearly tell that the second part of comparison should be in the form of a sentence, rather than a noun phrase or a prepositional phrase.

Thus, the following sentence(I just made it up randomly. It has nothing to do with the original prompt.) is incorrect :

It is nearly four times more likely that minority graduates will plan to practice in socioeconomically deprived areas than to work for multinational pharmaceutical corporations.

The above sentence is incorrect, right? Although it looks very parallel.
However, if I remove the "It is ... that xxxx will happen" structure from it:

Minority graduates are nearly four times more likely to plan to practice in socioeconomically deprived areas than to work for multinational pharmaceutical corporations.

Now, the above sentence is correct?

Ron, is there anything wrong with my above reasoning?
Thanks in advance.Sorry for the long post.

[RonPurewal]

Ron, you hit the nail on the head. What makes the sentence of comparison more complicated is exactly the "It is ... that xxxx will happen" structure.

Yeah, but that inversion is what makes the sentence actually readable.

If you're the one who created the sentence "” or if you're specifically prepared to see "That xxxxxx happens" as a noun "” then, sure, it's not very hard to interpret those sentences correctly. But, if you're just reading a random block of text one day and something like that appears ... it's just too hard to read.

From your explanation, can I consider it in the following way?

It is nearly four times more likely that minority graduates will plan to practice... than that other graduates will.

Since "It" refers to "that minority graduates will plan to practice... ", I reorganise it to :

(That minority graduates will plan to practice... ) is nearly four times more likely than (that other graduates will).

This sentence is technically correct, of course. However, a reader who is not specifically expecting this kind of construction would have to read it multiple times to interpret it correctly.

The only reason it's even easy for me to read this sentence is that you've conveniently highlighted the two parallel parts. If you take the highlighting away, I'll have to read it three or four times (or more), even though we're discussing that construction!

Fortunately, you don't have to construct sentences on this exam; you just have to recognize when things are ok and when they aren't ok.
(There's a hint here: "Reorganizing" the sentences like this is, for the purpose of GMAT preparation, a waste of your time. It may make you a more conscientious writer "” a noble goal indeed "” but that's not the point of this forum.)

[RonPurewal]

I know the above sentence is especially weird, but in this pattern, I could then clearly tell that the second part of comparison should be in the form of a sentence, rather than a noun phrase or a prepositional phrase.

You lost me at "noun phrase"; I don't know (or remember) what that is.
This may be part of the problem, though "” by being concerned with classifying things, you may be diverting brainpower away from looking at the two things and seeing whether they form a valid comparison.

[RonPurewal]

Thus, the following sentence(I just made it up randomly. It has nothing to do with the original prompt.) is incorrect :

It is nearly four times more likely that minority graduates will plan to practice in socioeconomically deprived areas than to work for multinational pharmaceutical corporations.

The above sentence is incorrect, right? Although it looks very parallel.

No. This sentence is fine, for exactly the same reason as "reason #1" listed in my post above (link: post95689.html#p95689 ).
You've got the two parallel constructions flanking "than", so you're good.

In many cases, that's the best you can possibly do.
E.g., In New York City, more people walk than drive to work. --> "Walk" and "drive" are flanking "than", so you're good. (There's obviously no way to get "more" directly in front of "walk".)

[RonPurewal]

However, if I remove the "It is ... that xxxx will happen" structure from it:

Minority graduates are nearly four times more likely to plan to practice in socioeconomically deprived areas than to work for multinational pharmaceutical corporations.

This is still exactly the same situation as the previous example.

If you thought the previous example was wrong, then you should think this one is wrong too.
I.e., it appears you thought the previous example was wrong because, as you saw it, "that minority graduates will plan" interfered with the construction.
The problem there is that you'd have exactly the same kind of interference with "to plan" here.

Both constructions are fine. Both are also optimal "” i.e., there's really no feasible way to get the requisite stuff any closer together.

Even you have tacitly acknowledged this point, because you actually changed the wording "” and, as a result, the meaning "” of the sentence to get this second version.
The change in meaning isn't so great, but it's there: the first sentence talks about the current likelihood of certain people forming certain future plans ("will plan"), whereas the second talks about present plans. Not nearly a big enough difference to be tested on the exam, but a difference nonetheless.

Again, both sentences are fine "” for exactly the same reason, and for the same reason as noun form #1 above.